Future of the Study
- Thread starter Bob Hubbard
- Start date
OP
OP
Different rule set at play. Casino, Arcade, etc had "can access" permissions.
With the forums, AFAIK it works like this:
I can set a "study access" user group up that you would have to be in to see it. I can make it a joinable group (there are a few now).
Most members will never find the option.
(Hell I get 1 email a week asking how to make a post.)
Setting it up so that all members by default are in that group, and can opt-out is the challenge.
Opting in isn't. It just means that only members at the time I set it up and add them will likely be active there.
New members will most likely never even look for it.
There are other variations. Make it visible by all, but you must opt in to post.
I'll get 1 email a week asking how to do that, despite a sticky in each area.
(I get 2-3 emails a week asking why people cant post events....there are numerous notes indicating why)
As to my sanity...that's long gone.
Steve
Mostly Harmless
Personally, I'd leave the forum as it is. Billicihak likes to stir the pot, but I personally don't have a problem with his posts. It's not always constructive, and he's usually argumentative, but I don't get any sense that he's dangerous. Rather, he strikes me as a guy who likes to argue, likes to stir things up and enjoys his status as the forum heel (in the pro wrestling sense). Once I realized that this is just a game for him, it put things in perspective for me.
The real issue for me at this time is that we have an unstable person amongst us and everyone's trying to pretend otherwise.
The real issue for me at this time is that we have an unstable person amongst us and everyone's trying to pretend otherwise.
I voted for making it an opt in feature. The Study is one of those places that you either love or hate. There is no middle. It allows for discussion thats not allowed in other areas, ie: world events, etc. Its a place where some extra heat is allowed, but its not a free for all, though some tend to try to make it that way. If someone opts in, then that tells me that they accept the rules of the field. If someone doesnt like it, but opts in anyway, and then complains, well, those people will get little to no sympathy from me. Why? Well, we're all supposed to be adults here, therefore, nobody is holding a gun to your head, forcing you to join in. If you join, be prepared to deal with the topics, the differences of opinion, and dont ***** about it! After all, you opted to join in.
And yes, as I've said many times, topics in this area will, 99% of the time, be hot ones. 99% of the time, you'll have everyone having different opinions. It'd sure be nice if people could respect the opinions of others. Makes alot of extra work when people have to resort to calling someone a dumb ****, an *******, a troll, or any of the other choice terms that've been used over time.
And yes, as I've said many times, topics in this area will, 99% of the time, be hot ones. 99% of the time, you'll have everyone having different opinions. It'd sure be nice if people could respect the opinions of others. Makes alot of extra work when people have to resort to calling someone a dumb ****, an *******, a troll, or any of the other choice terms that've been used over time.
granfire
Sr. Grandmaster
hmmm, I did not see you or your staff twist my arm participating....so it's already opt-in or -out....
not sure if I have a suggestion...
I have found the study rules to be very lenient (and sadly abused) compared to a set of rules put forth by a group of kids on another forum for the heavy topics. (let's just say a couple of Study regulars would have not lasted...)
Big Don
Sr. Grandmaster
qft
The playpen is fine. However, a couple of the kiddies smear the contents of their diapers on the walls. Get rid of them.
Archangel M
Senior Master
IMO this is a case study in modern mans lack of self control. People can't stop themselves from clicking on a link? Is this a "disease"? If someone is not violating a rule here this boils down to simply crying about not liking someones politics and attempting to get the powers that be to silence them. People need to cowboy up.
Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk
Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk
It's not really a question of using the ignore function or not clicking on a link. It's more like swimming in a pool that we all enjoy, but it has a certain amount of pee in it. At a certain point, it stops being nasty and becomes a health hazard. We can all ignore a little now and then. None of us want to swim in pure pee.
OP
OP
Last edited by a moderator:
Archangel M
Senior Master
Any "pool" filled with politics and religion should be recognized as having a high pee content before you jump in.
It's the other peoples pee that some people seem offended by. Their own just makes the water pleasantly warm in their part of the pool.
It's the other peoples pee that some people seem offended by. Their own just makes the water pleasantly warm in their part of the pool.
Archangel M
Senior Master
BTW I voted "don't care" I would keep it as is, but unlike some others (apparently) Im not so personally invested in the study that it's staying or going would alter my mood.
OP
OP
Personally I'd like to keep it. Some issues I enjoy discussing.
But, the overall health of MT is in my thoughts.
Worst case I suppose I could spin it off as a stand-alone site. Just need someone to donate $500 to the cause, lol.
But, the overall health of MT is in my thoughts.
Worst case I suppose I could spin it off as a stand-alone site. Just need someone to donate $500 to the cause, lol.
When my apartment complex had some problems with gang-bangers, we complained to the management. After enough people complained, they evicted the troublemakers. There was no discussion of shutting down the apartment complex because apparently people could not live in peace within it.
On the other hand, I once lived in an apartment complex that refused to get rid of the few trouble-makers they had. I moved, as did most of the decent people I knew who lived nearby.
To me, the problem is not one that requires extensive navel-gazing or vote-taking. We all know the problem children are. They refuse to clean up their act and have even made it clear that they intend to continue baiting people so that they can claim they are the victims when people explode with anger at their horrible posts. Dump those idiots and let peace and common sense return. People *can* disagree without being disagreeable; but not when they are confronted with the type of garbage we've been subjected to lately. Yes, the decent people can all go elsewhere, or choose to put up with the gangsters, but it's easier to get rid of the gangsters. So that's my vote. Dump the troublemakers. Sorry nobody has the courage to say that, but I do.
On the other hand, I once lived in an apartment complex that refused to get rid of the few trouble-makers they had. I moved, as did most of the decent people I knew who lived nearby.
To me, the problem is not one that requires extensive navel-gazing or vote-taking. We all know the problem children are. They refuse to clean up their act and have even made it clear that they intend to continue baiting people so that they can claim they are the victims when people explode with anger at their horrible posts. Dump those idiots and let peace and common sense return. People *can* disagree without being disagreeable; but not when they are confronted with the type of garbage we've been subjected to lately. Yes, the decent people can all go elsewhere, or choose to put up with the gangsters, but it's easier to get rid of the gangsters. So that's my vote. Dump the troublemakers. Sorry nobody has the courage to say that, but I do.
Archangel M
Senior Master
While I get the allegory...this is the internet. Hasn't everybody been exposed to the saying about what arguing on the internet is like???
Twin Fist
Grandmaster
granfire
Sr. Grandmaster
Last edited by a moderator:
OP
OP
Naming names here.
Bill, I agree with you in principle here. Booting the troublemakers makes sense.
But, how do we decide who gets the boot?
I can look at our reports for a hint.
But half of those are 'I disagree with him, so smack him for me'.
Or aren't 'a big deal'.
I can say "These 3".
And boot TwinFist, billicihak and, well someone else...maybe me.
A few years ago the names were different.
Tellner, Big Don and MichaelEdward.
A few years before that, 3 others.
At 1 point, it was def. myself and Arnisador.
Archs been listed, Elder, yourself, Tez, Suk, and a dozen others.
In fact, look at the top 10 posters in The Study for any given year. 7 of the 10 are on the "Bob, you need to boot them now" list.
I know who's the current PITA list. The question is though....What's in the best interests of MT?
Sometimes, keeping the PITA is good for business. Sometimes it puts you out of it.
Hard call.
And please, no body I just named get bent out of shape, again, for being named. Last time I used this example I got 3 offers to leave.
Bill, I agree with you in principle here. Booting the troublemakers makes sense.
But, how do we decide who gets the boot?
I can look at our reports for a hint.
But half of those are 'I disagree with him, so smack him for me'.
Or aren't 'a big deal'.
I can say "These 3".
And boot TwinFist, billicihak and, well someone else...maybe me.
A few years ago the names were different.
Tellner, Big Don and MichaelEdward.
A few years before that, 3 others.
At 1 point, it was def. myself and Arnisador.
Archs been listed, Elder, yourself, Tez, Suk, and a dozen others.
In fact, look at the top 10 posters in The Study for any given year. 7 of the 10 are on the "Bob, you need to boot them now" list.
I know who's the current PITA list. The question is though....What's in the best interests of MT?
Sometimes, keeping the PITA is good for business. Sometimes it puts you out of it.
Hard call.
And please, no body I just named get bent out of shape, again, for being named. Last time I used this example I got 3 offers to leave.
